This invention relates to method and system for servicing generally complex equipment, and, more particularly, to computer-based method and system for graphically identifying replacement parts for servicing any selected equipment.
The diagnosis, maintenance, and repair of generally complex equipment, such as mobile assets including on-road or off-road vehicles, ships, airplanes, railroad locomotives, trucks, and other forms of complex equipment including industrial equipment, consumer appliance equipment, medical imaging equipment, equipment used in industrial processes, telecommunications, aerospace applications, power generation, etc., involves extremely complex and time consuming processes. In the case of transportation equipment, efficient and cost-effective operation of a fleet of vehicles necessitates a reduction in the number of vehicle road failures and minimization of vehicle down-time. This can be accomplished by predicting impending failures, by performing preventative maintenance, and by performing repairs quickly and accurately. For example, it will be appreciated that the ability to predict failures before they occur allows for performing condition-based maintenance. Such maintenance can be conveniently scheduled based on statistically and probabilistically meaningful vehicle status information, instead of performing the maintenance regardless of the actual condition of a respective system, subsystem, assembly, subassembly, part, etc., such as would be the case if the maintenance is routinely performed independent of whether any of the foregoing structures actually requires the maintenance.
The conventional diagnosis and repair process for most vehicles and other generally complex equipment is based on the experience of the service technician, using paper-based information describing the structure and operation of the equipment, and performance records maintained in a log. Examining the log entries, experienced service technicians can use their accumulated experience and training in mapping incidents occurring in locomotive systems, subsystems, assemblies, subassemblies, etc., to problems that may be causing these incidents. For simple problems, this process works well. However, if the problem is complex and the root cause difficult to discern, the experienced technician may be unable to identify the problem and certainly much less likely to prognosticate problems before they occur.
Various equipment often incorporates diagnostic controls and sensors that report faults when anomalous operating conditions of the equipment arise. Typically, to diagnose the problem, a technician will study the fault log to identify the nature of the problem and determine whether a repair is necessary. While the fault log can provide some diagnosis and repair information, the technician also relies substantially on his prior experiences with the equipment, or others like it, to make a full diagnosis.
To conduct the repair, the technician uses block diagrams, exploded diagrams, parts lists, assembly drawings, schematics, etc. The repair information may be applicable only to a specific equipment by model number; the repair information will generally not be unique to the specific equipment undergoing repair. It will be apparent that as the complexity of the equipment increases, the amount of paper needed to describe the equipment to assist with the repair process likewise increases. Again, the technician will rely on his experiences with the equipment, and others like it, to perform the repair.
Yet another problem with a paper-based system is the variety of field-deployed equipment configurations, each having its own unique technical support documentation. In the case of locomotives, even for a specific model (identified by a model number), there may be several locomotive configurations as locomotive subsystems were redesigned or changed during the model production run. Thus, in a sense, no two locomotives are the same. Adding this configuration complexity to a paper-based system presents an inordinately complex and unmanageable problem of locating the correct technical repair documentation for a specific locomotive.
Another repair issue involving complex equipment, such as railroad locomotives or other mobile or stationary assets, is the unavailability of a repair history from which one could predict component failures and undertake preventative maintenance beforehand. Technicians with wide ranging and lengthy experiences may be able to predict a component failure and repair it to avoid a breakdown during operation, in some limited situations.
One tool available for locomotive repair manually downloads fault logs from a locomotive while it is parked at a maintenance facility. These fault logs are then uploaded to the railroad maintenance service center. The tool also includes standardized helpful hints for repair tasks and fault analysis descriptors based on single failure faults. Although such a device represents an improvement over a paper-based system, it falls short of the informational needs for a complex equipment, such as a locomotive, and fails to advantageously utilize the various technologies available for more efficiently predicting and performing the repair.
The techniques of the present invention in one aspect thereof may be useful in identifying and ordering replacement parts for complex equipment having multiple configurations. For example, while locomotives are routinely sold under particular model numbers, each locomotive is typically customized for a particular application or customer. Consequently, when a user needs to identify replacement or repair parts or check on upgrades for a particular locomotive, it is often difficult for that user to particularly identify the needed part or upgrade without knowing more about the particular locomotive. In many instances, the user may not know the particular parts or level of upgrade of a locomotive that is in use. However, manufacturers of locomotives generally keep detailed records of the status of each part or assembly or sub-assembly of a locomotive during manufacture and also track upgrades to that locomotive since such upgrades are normally done by purchase of upgrade kits from the original manufacturer. Accordingly, it is common for a locomotive user to contact the locomotive manufacturer in order to identify replacement parts or upgrades for a locomotive. Thus, it would be advantageous for service personnel to have access via a communications network to detailed information concerning the parts content or upgrade status of any selected equipment that may be ready to undergo a servicing activity.